[237.] The process of elevating religious concepts and purifying them of unworthy admixtures must, however, have taken place, and the true concepts must have been deeply impressed, before the mythological conceptions of antiquity become known; in which case the latter will produce the right effect by the contrast between the manifestly fabulous and crude, and the worthy and sublime. If managed properly, this subject presents no difficulties.
[238.] But there are other difficulties,—difficulties growing out of individual peculiarities. While some would be harmed by much talk about sin, because they would thus either become acquainted with it, or else be filled with fantastic terror, there are others whom only the strongest language can move, and still others who themselves preach against the sins of the world, and, at the same time, front the world in proud security. Then there are those who brood over ethical problems, and who, without having heard of Spinoza, argue that what the Highest Judge has permitted to happen he has approved of, whence might is the practical proof of right. There are contemners of mere morality, who think that prayers will consecrate their evil actions. Isolated traces of such perversions may indeed be met with even in children, especially if their glib reproduction of the sermon, or worse yet, their praying aloud, has happened to receive praise.
Hence it is necessary to observe the effect of religious instruction on each individual. Another task for home training.
[ CHAPTER II
History]
[239.] The most common blunder that younger teachers of history are apt to make is that, without intending it, they become increasingly prolix in presentation. It is not that interest deepens, but that the network of events lures them, now one way, now another. This of itself evinces preparation; but mental preparation alone does not suffice; preliminary practice, too, is necessary.
Young teachers of history, like young teachers in other subjects, are prone to error. What the prevailing error in a given study will be, is likely to depend upon conventional methods of presenting it. In Germany it is customary for the teacher himself to be the historian through whose mind all historical knowledge passes on its way to the children. But just as good writers of history are rare, so good teachers of history are likely to be few, since in an important sense they are at once teachers and oral historians. Where the text-book is depended upon for the narrative, as in the United States, a different difficulty presents itself to the teacher. What shall he do with the text, all the pupils having read it? Perhaps the commonest method is to call upon them one by one to reproduce it in class. But this is a deadening process, since it compels nineteen pupils to sit passive while the twentieth recites the words that the nineteen could repeat equally well. If, therefore, the besetting fault of the teacher of history in German is prolixity, that of the American teacher is tediousness. The German method is that of primitive man, where the legends of the tribe are handed down from father to son by word of mouth; the American presentation of history is modern, where all the resources of scholarship and the advantages of the printing press are utilized. Each method has peculiar advantages, the former having the possible charm of first-hand narrative, the latter that of accuracy and comprehensiveness. The narrative method is greatly superior to that of the text-book with children whose powers of reading are not well developed; the text-book, together with its available accessories, is greatly to be preferred with older pupils capable of large amounts of reading. The following sections give a vivid description of the narrative method at its best; the commentary will attempt to show how the printed page may be made equally attractive, and, at the same time, much more useful.
[240.] If, to begin with, a purely chronological, but accurate, outline-view of history is to be imparted, the teacher must be able to traverse mentally the whole historical field, going with equal readiness back, forward, or across (synchronistically). The notable names must form definite groups and series; and the teacher must possess facility in making the most notable names stand out clearly from the groups, and in condensing the most salient points of a long series into a short series.
If this mastery of subject-matter is important for the narrator, it is equally important for the teacher who depends upon print for the narration. Observation of current history teaching betrays the fact that the teacher rarely becomes master of his material to such an extent that he can throw it into new forms. As it stands in the book, he probably knows it; but to take liberties with the facts, to expand parts, or throw masses into brief outline, to make new groupings, or to change a long series into a short one, usually lies beyond his ability. This lesson the American teacher must learn through a better mastery of his materials.
[241.] Again, the teacher must make himself perfectly familiar with general notions that relate to classes of society—constitutions, institutions, religious customs, stages of culture—and that serve to explain events. But not only this; he must study likewise the conditions under which he can develop them and keep them present in the minds of his pupils. This consideration alone shuts out most generalizations from the first lessons in history. And, accordingly, ancient history, whose moving causes are simpler than the more modern political factors, maintains its place in presentations of historical material to younger pupils.